Passenger-unfriendly downsides of e-tickets?

[mikeg]

E-tickets are vastly superior to m-tickets, that isn't up for debate but what I'd like to know is what remaining disadvantages are there for e-tickets versus credit card size ticket stock (CCST)? To clarify I'm not talking about flows for which e-tickets are not yet enabled.

I can think of a few:

1. Privacy - There is no scan history with paper tickets, so your movements aren't being tracked. This becomes less of a problem if bought from a TVM, and if paying cash the problem is eliminated.
2. Passenger verification of validity. E-tickets can be cancelled, yet it is not possible for the passenger to see this. I think this is a 'biggie', given that a cancelled ticket can lead to prosecution.

With respect to point 2, I'd like to clarify a few things:

1. Is it true that a guard or RPI has a feature to invalidate permanently an e-ticket electronically? If so, what is to stop a particularly desperate/corrupt RPI cancelling an e-ticket (s)he doesn't like, setting the passenger up for prosecution?
2. Where would the passenger stand if this happened and the passenger was not told about this?
3. Is it true that TOCs can unilaterally cancel and refund e-tickets, particularly ones deemed 'loopholes', and where does the passenger stand with respect to this?
4. Say this happened and the passenger wasn't adequately notified/wasn't able to view said notification, where does the passenger stand?

These reasons are why I continue to use and defend credit card size tickets for any complex journey whose validity is not unambiguous. In fact, I may switch to more use of CCST to make my preference clear, given these points. Call me overcautious, but if I lose my ticket at least it's something I have control over. The points I raised are not something I have control over. I've only ever once lost a ticket on the train, and it was recovered from the floor before the guard came round after a brief period of panic. I have on three occasions had an e-ticket rejected electronically, but on each occasion 'let off'. Can anyone reassure me that e-tickets are safe to use within the context of a railway eager to abuse its prosecution powers?

 

[JonathanH]

These reasons are why I continue to use and defend credit card size tickets for any complex journey whose validity is not unambiguous. In fact, I may switch to more use of CCST to make my preference clear, given these points.

PRT (paper roll ticket) is coming, at which point the scanning of paper and electronic tickets won't differ.

 

[mikeg]

PRT (paper roll ticket) is coming, at which point the scanning of paper and electronic tickets won't differ.

Indeed and I am against this move if it retains my hypothesised downsides. That's why I propose to make a last stand in many ways. Anyway my questions still stand, but now apply to PRTs as well as e-tickets. One way to partially solve this may be a tool by which the passenger can themselves view the scan history and audit trail.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

CCST, (typical orange tickets), are also only anonymous to a point, and in some cases can be tracked across the network, although not in the same way or extent as barcodes.

Gatelines do record data of all magnetic tickets that pass through them, and whilst it capturing details of an Edinburgh to Glasgow Anytime Day Single isn't very helpful, a ticket from Dunrobin Castle to Gunnislake (or some other very unusual origin/destination pairs) can be unique enough to track that throughout the country. It's the same with unusual discounts. You'd probably be quite successful in tracing how an Edinburgh to Glasgow SDS was used if it had a Travel Agents Discount Authority applied, for example.

You still get the police making requests to TOCs for details of magnetic tickets (and other tickets) that passed through at X time on Y date, using gate number Z. Normally when they're looking for someone and have CCTV of them using the railway.

But you're correct in that barcodes are easier to track and have far richer datasets.

Linking a CCST to a customer is far harder. All well and good being able to track the journey, but it is much harder to also link that to a name. BTP could probably get the customer info from banks/ card providers, but TOCs wouldn't have the resources to do this in bulk and certainly not for minor offences. Cash, well what can you do?!

 

[Adam Williams]

1. Is it true that a guard or RPI has a feature to invalidate permanently an e-ticket electronically?

If they do, this is news to me. I was under the impression that only the retailer could cancel the UTNs in this way.

On-train staff can record that a ticket has been accepted for travel or rejected, but not that it has been refunded, as far as I'm aware. TTK seems to have a "Request automatic refund" action, but I have no idea what that's for, or what it would actually do. I suspect nothing would happen in reality - it's marked "DO NOT USE" in the spec..

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

If they do, this is news to me. I was under the impression that only the retailer could cancel the UTNs in this way.

On-train staff can record that a ticket has been accepted for travel or rejected, but not that it has been refunded, as far as I'm aware. TTK seems to have a "Request automatic refund" action, but I have no idea what that's for, or what it would actually do. I suspect nothing would happen in reality - it's marked "DO NOT USE" in the spec..

I don't know about RPIs, but TOC Retail Systems Managers can flag specific UTNs to automatically be rejected/hotlisted - but I understand that this is more in the ticket checking software, (so it prompts staff to reject the ticket), rather than actually altering the underlying eTVD data. Other TOCs or retailers wouldn't reject as a result.

Obviously depends on who's providing your software too...

 

[Adam Williams]

I don't know about RPIs, but TOC Retail Systems Managers can flag specific UTNs to automatically be rejected/hotlisted - but I understand that this is more in the ticket checking software, (so it prompts staff to reject the ticket), rather than actually altering the underlying eTVD data. Other TOCs or retailers wouldn't reject as a result.

Interesting to hear, though you'd hope that that was only used in very exceptional circumstances if the retailer has no visibility of what's been done to the ticket, but the passenger then gets prevented from travelling with that TOC. I can maybe see there could be some "prevention of crime" use-cases.

 

[thedbdiboy]

Magstripe technology is obsolete and will be gone in a few years, paper tickets will still exist but use barcode printing, which also has the advantage of moving everything to a common scanning platform. A paper ticket bought at station will still be anonymous, but there is a distinction to be made between paper vs e-ticket and the CCST magstripe ticket.

 

[redreni]

I share your concern to some extent about privacy. If I thought the data would only be used in appropriate ways for the detection of irregular travel or crime and had confidence that people using the network legitimately wouldn't be hassled, I would have no concerns, but unfortunately on balance I prefer it if the TOCs know less rather than more.

I know you're asking specifically about the comparison between e-tickets and CCST, but also perhaps worth mentioning that some rail-only season tickets can be issued on either CCST or Smartcard. I don't know to what extent, if at all, the same concerns might apply to Smartcard seasons by comparison with CCSTs? There was a thread a while ago pointing out that London Underground ticket acceptance arrangements for rail-only CCST season ticket holders don't always apply to people holding the same season ticket on a Smartcard.

 

[Somewhere]

Perhaps the barcode should be able to be read by the holder, so they can see what information is held

 

[Bletchleyite]

Perhaps the barcode should be able to be read by the holder, so they can see what information is held

I think this would be a worthwhile feature, though I can see why the railway might not want it. Shouldn't be impossibly hard for a retailer to implement it, or just a simple URL on the ticket using its UTN. Would reduce arguments on things like "he said she said" if permission given to travel outside validity was always done by recording on the ticket and the passenger could see it. Then it could be made very clear that permission isn't ever given unless it's blanket or it has been recorded on the ticket.

If they really wanted to be able to write "passenger is an argumentative idiot" they could, like most helpdesk systems do, have the option to select if a given note is customer visible or not.

The other reason to do this is so passengers can see if a ticket has been used before they erroneously attempt to request a refund on it or use it again, easy to get confused if you have a lot sat there and the consequences of doing so can be significant. Or if they've forgotten which train they used and need to claim Delay Repay.

 

[Haywain]

Interesting to hear, though you'd hope that that was only used in very exceptional circumstances if the retailer has no visibility of what's been done to the ticket, but the passenger then gets prevented from travelling with that TOC. I can maybe see there could be some "prevention of crime" use-cases.

There are lots of things that TOC Retail Systems Managers might be able to do, but that doesn't mean they actually do them (and I speak from experience of the role) but the only UTNs we had real access to were those issued by our website, so we were acting as the retailer. With those issued elsewhere I can only recall using UTNs to ascertain the nature of problems that had been encountered.

 

[blakey1152]

For me, I absolutely hate e-tickets because for me they cause me a huge amount of anxiety. I prefer having a nice credit card sized ticket with my journey on it.
I have nothing but issues trying to scan those e-tickets at barriers - even being told at Liverpool Street when I had a Hare Fare e-ticket that if it doesn't scan its not valid!

As long as they keep paper style tickets in one form or the other I am happy and remember not everyone owns a smart phone either.
The privacy issue doesn't bother me in the slightest, In fact I'd rather people be aware of where I've been and gone in case of an emergency than remain anonymous

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

For me, I absolutely hate e-tickets because for me they cause me a huge amount of anxiety. I prefer having a nice credit card sized ticket with my journey on it.
I have nothing but issues trying to scan those e-tickets at barriers - even being told at Liverpool Street when I had a Hare Fare e-ticket that if it doesn't scan its not valid!

As long as they keep paper style tickets in one form or the other I am happy and remember not everyone owns a smart phone either.
The privacy issue doesn't bother me in the slightest, In fact I'd rather people be aware of where I've been and gone in case of an emergency than remain anonymous

I definitely advocate for digital skills sessions by TOCs. I know EMR ran a few brief sessions at their main stations, teaching customers how to use barcode tickets etc.

Whether it's an e-ticket on a mobile phone, or a barcode on a paper ticket, you are going to have to get used to scanning a barcode (or smartcard) to travel on UK rail in the very near future. The overwhelming majority of passengers have absolutely no issues whatsoever, so I'd not be too anxious, perhaps persevere a little more and you'll the hang of it soon enough! I remember when ticket gates first came in on the London Underground, people had similar reservations!

You'll struggle to find a credit card sized ticket soon enough.

 

[redreni]

I definitely advocate for digital skills sessions by TOCs. I know EMR ran a few brief sessions at their main stations, teaching customers how to use barcode tickets etc.

Whether it's an e-ticket on a mobile phone, or a barcode on a paper ticket, you are going to have to get used to scanning a barcode (or smartcard) to travel on UK rail in the very near future. The overwhelming majority of passengers have absolutely no issues whatsoever, so I'd not be too anxious, perhaps persevere a little more and you'll the hang of it soon enough! I remember when ticket gates first came in on the London Underground, people had similar reservations!

You'll struggle to find a credit card sized ticket soon enough.

I wouldn't deny that some of the reported usability issues with e-tickets will be on the passenger's side and would therefore be resolved in time simply by withdrawing the alternatives. The number of people of my parents' generation who became adept at video calling only when lockdown removed the option of conversing face to face was huge.

Blakey has raised an issue on the railway side, though, which you've simply ignored, namely some gateline staff's belief that if it doesn't scan, it isn't valid. I for one would be much more interested in your view on what, if anything, the rail industry could do differently or better rather than on what passengers can or should do.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Blakey has raised an issue on the railway side, though, which you've simply ignored, namely some gateline staff's belief that if it doesn't scan, it isn't valid. I for one would be much more interested in your view on what, if anything, the rail industry could do differently or better rather than on what passengers can or should do.

It depends what you mean by "doesn't scan". If they were suggesting that if it doesn't open the gates it's not valid then that's nonsense, there are lots of reasons a ticket may not open a gate, I find CCST don't half the time. However if they can't scan it *at all* and they have scanners to do so how can it be reliably validated even if it technically is valid? I don't doubt fraudsters deliberately create unscannable barcodes when editing tickets to be for whatever service they feel like.

A feature whereby the UTN could just be typed in to retrieve the ticket might be useful, but until we have "true e-ticketing" whereby the ticket is always in an easily retrievable single database that isn't viable. At present, as I understand it, aside from the attached seat reservations if any only the retailer knows about it until it is scanned.

I don't know what the actual rule on this is, though, can any staff here elaborate?

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

I wouldn't deny that some of the reported usability issues with e-tickets will be on the passenger's side and would therefore be resolved in time simply by withdrawing the alternatives. The number of people of my parents' generation who became adept at video calling only when lockdown removed the option of conversing face to face was huge.

Blakey has raised an issue on the railway side, though, which you've simply ignored, namely some gateline staff's belief that if it doesn't scan, it isn't valid. I for one would be much more interested in your view on what, if anything, the rail industry could do differently or better rather than on what passengers can or should do.

There's a huge difference between a ticket not scanning and a ticket scanning but being rejected.

It's impossible to say what should happen in the case of it not scanning at all - as the best course of action will depend on the unique circumstances of that incident. However, I don't think is unreasonable to issue instructions to staff that they should be extremely reluctant to permit travel to customers who's ticket doesn't scan at all, at least not without further checks being made.

I don't think it's a significant issue in any event, I can't recall reading any (or at least many) incidents where this has been a problem for a customer - the issues encountered with barcode tickets are largely similar to other formats, i.e. disputes over the validity of the ticket within the barcode. London Underground aside, of course.

 

[317 forever]

For me, I absolutely hate e-tickets because for me they cause me a huge amount of anxiety. I prefer having a nice credit card sized ticket with my journey on it.
I have nothing but issues trying to scan those e-tickets at barriers - even being told at Liverpool Street when I had a Hare Fare e-ticket that if it doesn't scan its not valid!

As long as they keep paper style tickets in one form or the other I am happy and remember not everyone owns a smart phone either.
The privacy issue doesn't bother me in the slightest, In fact I'd rather people be aware of where I've been and gone in case of an emergency than remain anonymous

With e-tickets you can still print them off. As well as having the inevitable barcode, they do have specific journey details included, as per traditional paper tickets.

 

[HughT]

One third of over 65s don't use a smartphone. No idea how many of them are rail passengers, but clearly there's a significant chunk of the population for whom e-tickets could well be "passenger-unfriendly" (OK, you can download them to a tablet or laptop, but let's not split hairs...)

[Full disclosure: I'm one of that 33%.]

[Source: Facts and figures about digital inclusion and older people (Age UK, June 2024) - data reflects the situation at the end of 2023.]

 

[Bletchleyite]

One third of over 65s don't use a smartphone. No idea how many of them are rail passengers, but clearly there's a significant chunk of the population for whom e-tickets could well be "passenger-unfriendly" (OK, you can download them to a tablet or laptop, but let's not split hairs...)

Though that number is only going to go down, and of those who don't most will still have a PC and a printer, even if it's purely a desktop. I suspect the number of households in 2024 with no computing device at all (and who don't know someone who could print one out for them) is very, very small. And the option to purchase a bog roll "e-ticket" at a station remains, be that at a booking office or a TVM.

So what you're talking about is people who book online but don't use a smartphone or have a printer or anyone else who can print it for them. That I suspect is a very, very small number - it might even be zero. I suspect, aside from where e-tickets aren't offered, basically nobody is choosing ToD when e-ticket is an option aside from those wishing to make a point of principle, and many of those people will prefer to pay cash at a station anyway, because you tend to find an almost complete intersection between "cash is king" people and "e-tickets are bad" people.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

One third of over 65s don't use a smartphone. No idea how many of them are rail passengers, but clearly there's a significant chunk of the population for whom e-tickets could well be "passenger-unfriendly" (OK, you can download them to a tablet or laptop, but let's not split hairs...)

[Full disclosure: I'm one of that 33%.]

[Source: Facts and figures about digital inclusion and older people (Age UK, June 2024) - data reflects the situation at the end of 2023.]

That's not an excuse not to do something, it's a good reason to invest in helping that demographic improve their digital skills. The number of people without a smartphone AND without access to a computer/printer will be single figure %.

You'll already be paying a premium for most other things in life if you aren't using technology. On the railway, certain tickets and fares aren't available anywhere other than online.

This demographic will have no choice other than to use barcodes in any event, aside from not travelling, as the other formats are being withdrawn. I'm sure they will cope with scanning a barcode on a paper ticket at a gateline, but staff will always show them what to do anyway.

 

[yorkie]

For me, I absolutely hate e-tickets because for me they cause me a huge amount of anxiety. I prefer having a nice credit card sized ticket with my journey on it.

You can print an e-ticket and it does display the journey on it.

I have nothing but issues trying to scan those e-tickets at barriers

I've had more issues with paper tickets than e-tickets lately.

- even being told at Liverpool Street when I had a Hare Fare e-ticket that if it doesn't scan its not valid!

It is well known that quite a few barrier staff make things up and they do this regardless of the medium.

As long as they keep paper style tickets in one form or the other I am happy and remember not everyone owns a smart phone either.

Paper tickets are going to be barcode tickets issued on flimsy pieces of paper; effectively the same as an e-ticket but you just get one printed copy, rather than the ability to have it on (a) device(s) as well as a physical copy.

One third of over 65s don't use a smartphone. No idea how many of them are rail passengers, but clearly there's a significant chunk of the population for whom e-tickets could well be "passenger-unfriendly" (OK, you can download them to a tablet or laptop, but let's not split hairs...)

[Full disclosure: I'm one of that 33%.]

[Source: Facts and figures about digital inclusion and older people (Age UK, June 2024) - data reflects the situation at the end of 2023.]

I asked a guard on a Northern service from York what proportion of passengers use barcode tickets and it is well over 90% and increasing. This matches what other staff have told me and also matches my own observations. Indeed I've been on trains where I have been the only person in my coach on a paper ticket (e.g. when using a Northern complimentary ticket) or where everyone had barcode tickets.

On Northern, LNER etc you can hear the Guards approaching by the beeps of their barcode readers; they no longer need to say "tickets please" as they walk through the carriages!

 

[Bikeman78]

E-tickets are vastly superior to m-tickets, that isn't up for debate but what I'd like to know is what remaining disadvantages are there for e-tickets versus credit card size ticket stock (CCST)? To clarify I'm not talking about flows for which e-tickets are not yet enabled.

I can think of a few:

1. Privacy - There is no scan history with paper tickets, so your movements aren't being tracked. This becomes less of a problem if bought from a TVM, and if paying cash the problem is eliminated.
2. Passenger verification of validity. E-tickets can be cancelled, yet it is not possible for the passenger to see this. I think this is a 'biggie', given that a cancelled ticket can lead to prosecution.

With respect to point 2, I'd like to clarify a few things:

1. Is it true that a guard or RPI has a feature to invalidate permanently an e-ticket electronically? If so, what is to stop a particularly desperate/corrupt RPI cancelling an e-ticket (s)he doesn't like, setting the passenger up for prosecution?
2. Where would the passenger stand if this happened and the passenger was not told about this?
3. Is it true that TOCs can unilaterally cancel and refund e-tickets, particularly ones deemed 'loopholes', and where does the passenger stand with respect to this?
4. Say this happened and the passenger wasn't adequately notified/wasn't able to view said notification, where does the passenger stand?

These reasons are why I continue to use and defend credit card size tickets for any complex journey whose validity is not unambiguous. In fact, I may switch to more use of CCST to make my preference clear, given these points. Call me overcautious, but if I lose my ticket at least it's something I have control over. The points I raised are not something I have control over. I've only ever once lost a ticket on the train, and it was recovered from the floor before the guard came round after a brief period of panic. I have on three occasions had an e-ticket rejected electronically, but on each occasion 'let off'. Can anyone reassure me that e-tickets are safe to use within the context of a railway eager to abuse its prosecution powers?

I agree. I will have paper tickets until the bitter end. I don't fancy a criminal record based on "computer says no." Anyone who say that will never happen, try working for the Post Office.

 

[trainophile]

Will we still be able to buy an Advance ticket online, and collect it as a barcode printed "bog roll" ticket at a station?

I'm fine with the principle of e-tickets, often get them for days out, but I do find it a juggling act at gatelines when I have luggage. Last Friday we were given paper cups of tea ten minutes before disembarking from a 1st Class TfW journey, and having backpacks plus hand luggage we had to remain on a bench on the station to drink them before exiting the gateline, even with an ordinary CCST, as we didn't have enough hands. The prospect of an expensive phone replacing the tea cup and being liable to be dropped during the process of getting the e-ticket up and scanning it is enough to deter me from using these by choice. As and when there's no alternative I will have to make some changes to my luggage arrangements, possibly swapping to bigger cases instead of backpacks so everything fits in one, which is antisocial as regards taking up luggage space.

I'm one of the minuscule percent of people who don't have a printer at home, having no need for one for any other purposes.

 

[yorkie]

I agree. I will have paper tickets until the bitter end. I don't fancy a criminal record based on "computer says no." Anyone who say that will never happen, try working for the Post Office.

That's fine but your paper tickets will be (Aztec) barcode tickets, which are effectively the same as e-tickets, except there is only one physical copy, i.e. no backup if you lose it.

Old style paper tickets without barcodes are being phased out.

 

[infobleep]

That's fine but your paper tickets will be (Aztec) barcode tickets, which are effectively the same as e-tickets, except there is only one physical copy, i.e. no backup if you lose it.

Old style paper tickets without barcodes are being phased out.

So will travelcards for London become paper tickets at some point?

 

[yorkie]

So will travelcards for London become paper tickets at some point?

You mean barcode tickets? Travelcards are going to be one of the sticking points and last uses of traditional paper tickets. I don't think anyone knows for sure what is going to happen in this area in the longer term.

When buying tickets at some locations, you only get an old style ticket if you require a Travelcard, U Zone ticket, or cross-London transfer (but the latter already has a resolution in the pipleline) wheras at other locations you may be told that the fare cannot be sold as they don't have the ticket issuing equipment to do it.

 

[JonathanH]

So will travelcards for London become paper tickets at some point?

The idea of making London Travelcards smartcard only has been discussed on this forum before.

 

[redreni]

You mean barcode tickets? Travelcards are going to be one of the sticking points and last uses of traditional paper tickets. I don't think anyone knows for sure what is going to happen in this area in the longer term.

When buying tickets at some locations, you only get an old style ticket if you require a Travelcard, U Zone ticket, or cross-London transfer (but the latter already has a resolution in the pipleline) wheras at other locations you may be told that the fare cannot be sold as they don't have the ticket issuing equipment to do it.

That is really rather irritating.

Maybe it's idealistic, but you would think phase 1 of a project to switch over from one format of tickets to another would be to phase in the equipment for the new format until it is everywhere, at which point you can commence phase 2 which is withdrawal of the old format.

That phases 1 and 2 are happening concurrently is absolutely no surprise in Great Britain's fragmented rail industry, but it is frustrating all the same.

The idea of making London Travelcards smartcard only has been discussed on this forum before.

Fine by me. Although I've had to revert to paper for day travelcards having previously switched over to smartcard because LNER only issues them on paper, and I want the Amex cashback.

 

[xotGD]

most will still have a PC and a printer,

I'm one of the minuscule percent of people who don't have a printer at home,

Is this the case? Do most people own printers? We haven't had one in a long time, as hardly ever used it. I will occasionally print stuff at work, but not often.

We don't even own a PC or laptop any more, just a tablet.